Language desk
< January 7	<< Dec \| January \| Feb >>	January 9 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Language Reference Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current reference desk pages.

January 8

"A threat to mankind"

When i am asking "Is it a threat to mankind?", should the 'm' in 'mankind' be capitalized? Jamesino 00:33, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I general writing, I don't think so. 惑乱分からん 01:17, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As a general rule, caps apply to proper nouns and words derived from proper nouns. "Mankind" is neither. --Diderot 17:03, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Of course if you're talking about the wrestler, then yeah, it should be capitalised. GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 12:32, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is a style reason to capitalize - it's more "dramatic" (hammy) to read "Is it a threat to Mankind?" (possible better as "Is it a threat to all Mankind?". This isn't to say it is correct to do so, but rather it can deliver a desired effect upon the reader - often in this case to laugh. Robovski 05:10, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No; mankind isn't a proper noun. Were it, say, "A threat to Poland", then obviously Poland would be capitalized.chiyo_no_saru 05:10, 18 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ycleft?

Can anyone find a definition for ycelft? I can't find a definition for the word anywhere. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.231.205.94 (talk) 03:06, 8 January 2007 (UTC).[reply]

That is because it is either misspelled, or a jocular pseudo-archaic form of "cleft". See yclept. --Lambiam ^Talk 04:04, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

...do you mean Wyclef Jean? -Elmer Clark 07:49, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Latin name list translation needed

Latin ———————————–––- English

ADAM - Adam (I assume)
NOE
NEMROTH
NINUS
SEMIRAMIS
ABRAAM
YSAAC
IACOB
IOSEPH
MOYSES
IASON
HERCULES

Thanks... --Doug 14:29, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Adam, Noah or Noach, Nimrod, Ninus, Semiramis, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Moses, Jason, and Hercules. --Lambiam ^Talk 14:50, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Lambiam...... --Doug 15:42, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The name Hercules is often said to be a Latin translation of Herakles, although the two can be considered different beings. Laïka 16:17, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Where does this list of names appear? In Jerome's Vulgate the name of Nimrod is Nemrod, and Abraam is not mentioned, it is Abram or Abraham. --Seejyb 21:29, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Petrarch's De viris illustribus.[1] Why he spells the name Nimrod/Nemrod with a "th" I don't know (the name in Hebrew ends with a dalet), but since the passage is about a king of Babylon who is a dedicated hunter, there is no doubt that this is our friend Nimrod. --Lambiam ^Talk 22:47, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for giving me these names in English and linking to Wikipedia. --Doug ^talk 22:11, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Latin translation

Do these words basically mean that of the "Preface" of a book and the "Forward" of a book? Are these Latin words or Italian words? Does the word "Liber" basically then mean that of an ordinary book (fiction or non-fiction) or something closer to a manuscript (many pages, however perhaps not a book) or just a document (of say one or two pages or just a few pages)?

Frontespizio
Prefatio

--Doug 16:38, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Frontespizio" is Italian. Vulgar (and I guess medieval) Latin would be "frontespicium". "Prefatio" appears to be well attested in medieval Latin - at least if Google is a good guide to attestation. And "liber" in late usage is a book in the sense of "Lord of the Rings: Book 1 - The Fellowship of the Ring". It seems to have ended up as a section label in large Latin tomes, and something like a manuscript when used to refer to a stand-alone work. Ovid's Metamorphoses uses "liber" for section headers, so it must have applied equally to fiction. --Diderot 16:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The use of "book" to which Diderot refers derives originally from how much you could fit into a scroll. This is the relevant sense when we're talking about the Iliad's 24 books, the Republic's ten, Pindar's three (lost) books of parthenia, etc. In Medieval works, the codex has replaced the scroll, so the meaning is no longer dictated by even this rough standard of quantity (except for an instinctive basis on Classical examples). In this context, it comes to be an authorial structuring device (whereas the oldest divisions, e.g. of the Homeric poems, were certainly not by the author). Wareh 20:35, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Italian frontespizio has the same meaning as English frontispiece, and late Latin prefatio the same as English preface. --Lambiam ^Talk 22:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Added links to above item --Anonymous, January 9, 00:09 (UTC))

Thanks all for these outstanding answers. --Doug ^talk 22:09, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

word meaning?

What does the word Inculcation mean. I have a vague idea, but am interested in a better difinition, and also some idea of how it could be used.Hidden secret 7 19:58, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To inculcate: to instill (an attitude, idea, or habit) by persistent instruction; to teach (someone) an attitude, idea, or habit by such instruction. --Richardrj ^talk ^email 20:02, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I need a word...

[I hope this is the correct forum in which to ask this question]] - is there a word, and if so what would that word be, which means in essence 'to consciously misquote, or alter a quotation, for a effect' - e.g. if one were to say 'cometh the hour, cometh the woman', or 'there are three types of lies, lies, damned lies, and the daily mail'. --Neo 20:18, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a verb, but snowclone seems to be close to what you're after. --Ptcamn 20:57, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This sort of thing is often discussed by theorists of humor (who break the cardinal rule against explaining jokes). For typical examples, see the results of this google search. Wareh 21:13, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thats the right kind of idea, but it seems that the phrases there must be a little more well known that the example of which I'm thinking - that is, there must be a heritage of replacing words in a given phrase with others. --Neo 12:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would usually say the person was paraphrasing, but perhaps that's not specific enough for what you're thinking? Skittle 00:47, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That was my first instinct, but I was unsure and checked: according to 'paraphrase' the term actually means to rephrase an acutal quotation while keeping the meaning the same - for instance 'to boldly go where no man has gone before' into 'to explore, without fear, lands untrodden by humankind'. --Neo 12:18, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, "paraphrase" is not an actual synonym for "misquote for effect", but it is often used, correctly, in sentences describing this process. When one is misquoting for effect, the usual form is "To paraphrase Voltaire,...". When one is relaying another's misquote, the form is "...paraphrased Voltaire, to the effect that..."--Pharos 11:37, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ngov

How do you pronounce the name "Ngov"? Thanks. --Proficient 22:31, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Likely with a velar nasal in front? Is it Vietnamese? 惑乱分からん 23:43, 8 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt it's Vietnamese, as I can't think of any words in Vietnamese (from my limited knowledge) that end in 'v'. I think 'v' is only an initial consonant in Vietnamese, but I'm not sure. It sounds more like Cambodian to me, in which case the velar nasal would be appropriate.CCLemon-安部さん万歳！ 03:20, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am not quite sure if it Vietnamese or not, either. But thanks for your help (both of you). If anyone else has heard of the name before, I'd be glad for more responses. --Proficient 06:29, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A quick Google Search gave this if that is any help. It says the company Ngov Heng is based in Phnom Penh, so it looks like it's Cambodian.CCLemon-安部さん万歳！ 06:50, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm, I think Khmer language phonotactics allow initial velar nasals, but I couldn't tell from the article on phonology. 惑乱分からん 10:58, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

They do, yes, just like a large number of languages from that area. The problem is with the final v, which I believe is only limited to Khmer languages, as the other languages in Indo-China only have p, t, k, n, m, and ng as finals (generally).CCLemon-ここは寒いぜ！ 21:58, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lexicography

Are there any decent online, free sources on lexicography? I'd find it very interesting and useful for working on Wiktionary. Our WP article lists what appears to be good books, but nothing free. A google search didn't turn up anything except associations and definitions. But then again, I'm no google wizard. Thanks - Taxman ^Talk 04:16, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Related etymologies?

My Hindi dictionary give the etymology for बेहतर (behtar) as being from the Persian bĕhtar. The Hindi sounds fairly close to the English word better and does mean better or very good. This dictionary (Oxford Hindi-English) is pretty careful about giving it's etymologies and if it was straight from English to the Persian, it seems like it would have said so. The etymology for the English "better" is given in the Oxford English 2nd ed. as Old Teutonic and lists a number of Old English, Old Frisian, Old Saxon, etc usages. Nothing that looks directly related between the Hindi/Persian and English. Is it as simple as being from similar IE roots or more direct borrowing? As a side note, what are some good sources for looking up other language etymologies like this? Thank you. - Taxman ^Talk 04:16, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I heard they were unrelated. For other language etymologies, you often have to be able to read the language, in question. 惑乱分からん 10:59, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since "better" has been derived from the IE root bhad-, it does seem that it would be unrelated to the Hindi & Persian words. Wareh 13:40, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would guess that they may as well be related! Sanskrit word close to better could be भद्रतर (bhadratar)which is from the root bhand, now since Persian and Sanskrit are pretty close so why can't they be related? User:Vineet Chaitanya

Actually I should not have been so quick. Taxman says that the Hindi word may be a borrowing from Persian, and, as the chart at Indo-European sound laws shows, IE bh became b in Persian (as in Germanic). Without checking a better reference for myself, though, I'm still wondering whether the etymology Taxman cites doesn't actually mean to say that the Hindi word is cognate with (as opposed to derived from) the Persian word. In that case, Sanskrit/Hindi b (as opposed to bh) would seem to rule out a connection to IE bhad-. In any case, Pokorny recognizes only Germanic derivatives of the root bhad-, so what Wakuran "heard" seems to be the standard view. Wareh 14:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely from the Persian. Basically in this case it's a Persian word borrowed into Hindi, like a large number of other Hindi words. But since the bh fell to b in the Germanic derivatives, what would lead you to say that wouldn't be possible in the Persian? Hindi carries the Indic distinction between the unaspirated b and the aspirated bh, but I don't believe Persian does. I suppose the question can't be answered without a source showing the etymology of the Persian word bĕhtar. - Taxman ^Talk 17:11, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think morphologically the Persian word is beh good + -tar for the comparative degree; for example khubtar = (also) better, bishtar = more, bozorgtar = bigger, moshkeltar = harder, zudtar = quicker. The development bhad > beh is hard to explain. --Lambiam ^Talk 18:34, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since it is a Persian borrowing, then (as far as I understand these things) bh > b is not the problem (which is exactly why I said I'd been too quick the first time). So I take Lambiam to mean that it's not the initial consonant that produces the difficulties in the way of the bhad > beh development. Is that right? Wareh 19:25, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Correct. To be more specific, the final d turning into an h may be problematic. Consider further that, but for the coincidence that the initial t of -tar can be mistaken for a final consonant of *beht, the hypothesis of a relationship would most likely not arise. (For example, if the comparative in Persian was formed with the suffix *-kar, the word would have been *behkar.) --Lambiam ^Talk 00:32, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Speech stereotypes

There exists a stereotype of the Chinese language and other Asian languages that it contains a lot of chings, changs, wangs, and such. A stereotype for Germanic languages seems to be related to the amount of "sch" sounds and being a very "hard" sounding language as opposed to being sing-song-y. So, what I'm wondering is if the English language has any stereotypes associated with it. Being just another stupid American, I don't know what other culture's stereotypes about the English language would be. And furthermore, is there a difference between the view of American English and Brit English? Dismas|^(talk) 06:43, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Here in Japan, the general stereotype of English is lots of long vowels, lots of curling of the tongue, and lots of emphasis on syllables. If you listen to a Japanese person jokingly imitating a 'foreigner' (all foreigners are American to the Japanese) speaking Japanese, you can really hear how they seem to hear English. In fact, it sounds like John Wayne speaking Japanese while chewing a hamburger. CCLemon-安部さん万歳！ 06:59, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

From the British viewpoint, American English is all 'R's. --Auximines 09:47, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So, we're all pirates to you Brits? :-) Dismas|^(talk) 01:34, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The British certainly don't use Rs .... I've had British people complain about my Canadian pronounciation of Butter which has an r, but no ts, which is apparently wrong. ;) WilyD 18:48, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's canadian? "bu'err" for butter (I assume that's the sort of thing you mean?) sounds like a typical 'farmer's accent' to my British ears. Oo arr... Skittle 01:07, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Isn't that just another stereotype, a la Kenneth Williams playing "Arthur Fallowfield'" in Beyond Our Ken? His response to any topic of discussion always began with "Oi think the ahnserrr loys in the soil". JackofOz 02:24, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To say it's just a stereotype suggests it's not used, and I'm fairly sure there are still farmers out there with that accent. At least there are on The Archers :-) Skittle 23:36, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't say a stereotypical behaviour is never encountered (after all, how did the stereotype arise in the first place?). It's just not encountered as ubiquitously as one might be lead to believe. JackofOz 01:20, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It might be encountered, but why is the stereotypical Brit portrayed as a man with a suit, bowler hat, and an umbrella? In fact, in the UK I've never seen a man with an umbrella (as it is considered feminine), nor have I ever seen a bowler hat. Do Ozzies really wear cowboy hats with corks dangling from them? Stereotypes are just a way of making fun of a 'quaint' culture, based on very biased views,which are based again on lack of contact with the real people. I agree with JackofOz.CCLemon-ここは寒いぜ！ 09:57, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Heh. "Aussies" wearing hats with dangling corks - I really would love to know how that one became such an enduring icon of unreality. However, the "striped suit, bowler hat and umbrella" was a real fashion among London businessmen. Our bowler hat article says they ceased being normal attire in the 1960s, but I think they lingered somewhat longer than that. I can think of many English films and TV shows made in the 1970s and later in which people were shown dressed this way (eg. The Fall and Rise of Reginald Perrin, which was set in the then-present day, 1976-79). Some of them were comical and probably included an element of parody; but some were serious representations of the way people actually dressed at that time. JackofOz 02:13, 15 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Antidisestablishmentarianism

Is it still the longest word in English?--Light current 07:34, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

See Antidisestablishmentarianism and Longest word in English. Dismas|^(talk) 07:54, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There is another really long word like this. I can't remember all of it, but it starts with Flo... Try looking in the Oxford English Dictionary.Hidden secret 7 19:44, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're probably thinking of Floccinaucinihilipilification. -GTBacchus^(talk) 21:04, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

All our long words are tiny. There is a word in Swedenish, which I think refers to someones job, with more than 100 letters. And the capital city of a place in asia is much longer than this. But in england we have lots of longest words.Hidden secret 7 19:49, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Before posting questions to the Wikipedia reference desk, please review How to ask a question. You will usually find your answer fastest (and incur the least amount of effort by others) when you use the search box to find the answer you're looking for. In this specific case, the search "Is antidisestablishmentarianism still the longest word in english" refers to both Antidisestablishmentarianism and longest word in English. -- dpotter 21:02, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The longest word which I actually use is anthropomorphization. (I hope this edit makes it in, my computer is really out to get me today.) StuRat 03:28, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I can beat that by one letter with nonconfigurationality. --Ptcamn 22:34, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Language/2007 January 8

Contents